6.5L future?

[XTIAN]

Somebody has an idea of the future of our 6.5 engine?
It seems that without new heads with direct injection this engine will not pass the new emissions controls.

[Robyn]

Welcome to TDP

The 6.5 was built during the 1992 to 2001 era. The current and upcoming regs have no effect on previously manufactured vehicles.

The only vehicles currently being manufactured "NEW" with a 6.5 are the military HMMWV with the P400 engine.

These rigs are exempt from the regs anyway.

I would not worry too much about your older vehicle and the new regs.

[Edahall]

Somebody has an idea of the future of our 6.5 engine?
It seems that without new heads with direct injection this engine will not pass the new emissions controls.

All the emission controls garbage is one big advantage of owning one of these engines. Even where I live in CA, smog testing is not required for both my 82 & 90 Suburbans.

[More Power]

Draconian retroactive emissions regulations could affect the 6.5. California is doing this with OTR trucks, buses and some AG equipment. But, it's a sticky area of regulation because of how many people retro laws would affect. Trucks/buses/AG involve much smaller numbers of people.

I suspect that any attempt to remove older vehicle from the highways will involve programs similar to "Cash for Clunkers", that are lucrative enough for older vehicle owners to produce a mass turn-in.

In the meantime, enjoy your 6.2/6.5. It'll be a long time, in most areas of the country, before anytihng is done. As long as owners can obtain reasonably priced replacement parts and fuel, they'll stay on the road. :)

Jim

[a5150nut]

Draconian retroactive emissions regulations could affect the 6.5. California is doing this with OTR trucks, buses and some AG equipment. But, it's a sticky area of regulation because of how many people retro laws would affect. Trucks/buses/AG involve much smaller numbers of people.

I suspect that any attempt to remove older vehicle from the highways will involve programs similar to "Cash for Clunkers", that are lucrative enough for older vehicle owners to produce a mass turn-in.

In the meantime, enjoy your 6.2/6.5. It'll be a long time, in most areas of the country, before anytihng is done. As long as owners can obtain reasonably priced replacement parts and fuel, they'll stay on the road. :)

Jim


Don't leave out the construction equipment. Damn state is after them too. With all the required "improvements", they can't hardly move empty!

[Pelado]

Good question, I've heard that the DoD placed the last order of HMMWVs with AM General last month.
That would mean the demise of the new P400 engine too.

[Stratosurfer]

One issue to consider is the new ULSD and the 2010 standard. The new fuel is rough on IP's due to no lube (sulfur) and many OEM's are having hell getting their diesels to pass the 2010 standard.
A friend of mine has only owned Dodge Cummins pickups for over 10 years now, trading in on a new one every 3 years or so. He just got a deal on a new '09 Quad Cab Cummins that was sweet. He had so much problem with it (the engine has something like 7 filters that were clogging and setting codes) that Dodge took it back from him and he swapped it for a '10 gas version. As I understand it Cummins was supposed to have the best technology for passing the 2010 EPA stds and apparently their having serious problems.
IMHO the EPA has taken much of the advantages out of owning a diesel. If I had the cash and had to buy a 2010 or newer truck, I would definitely buy a gas motor. Keeping our old 6.5's, Ford 7.3's and older Cummins in the best option. Take a look at the price the old Ford Excursions with 7.3's are selling for.
I'm adding 1/2 oz ATF per gallon to put the sulfur back in as well as some extra BTU's of POWER and enjoying life!

[Robyn]

THe ULSD is really not all that bad on the fuel systems.
My 95 model Cat went a long ways on the stuff before we had to change the injectors.
What got them was a cup seal in the head that sprung a leak and started allowing antifreeze into the fuel system. :eek: The glycol really raises hell with the injectors.

The ATF was always the gold standard with truckers as an additive.

ATF also will clean the system out due mostly to all the detergents in it.

The stuff will/can leave deposits in the combustion chambers ???? but in the smalll amounts used it won't hurt much.

2 stroke oil is also a good lube for the IP.

I have been running straight ULSD in the 6.2/6.5 since it came out and have not had any issues SO FAR. :confused:

The low sulfer will make the exhaust system last a whole lot longer.

The sulfer residue along with water makes sulfurous acid, which corrodes the exhaust and other things too.

Also the sulfer that gets past the rings gets into the oil and does bad things there too.

Its a double edged sword.

Missy

[jerry598]

In some other thread concern was expressed about the red ATF being confused with red-dyed diesel. Probably a petty thing. I don't know. I think I'll use the blue TCW3 outboard oil, mainly because its a little cheaper last time I looked, especially in qts & cases.

[DmaxMaverick]

No offense here. I'd like to clear up a couple myths......



One issue to consider is the new ULSD and the 2010 standard. The new fuel is rough on IP's due to no lube (sulfur) and many OEM's are having hell getting their diesels to pass the 2010 standard.

Sulfur isn't a lubricant. The sulfur removal process decreases the fuel's lubricity. This is easily offset by the use of a good additive.


...........I'm adding 1/2 oz ATF per gallon to put the sulfur back in as well as some extra BTU's of POWER and enjoying life!At that ratio, you are mixing about 250:1. You aren't adding any BTU's, sulfur or power. You are adding 10wt. oil with a huge package of additives, most of which are not friendly, over time, with the combustion chamber (rings, valve seats, valve guides, piston crowns), injector nozzles, and many rubber hose and seal compounds commonly found in the fuel system.


The use of ATF in Diesel fuel system is old school. Really old school. 30 years ago, at best (old habits die hard). It is not a good regular maintenance additive for modern (1980+) Diesel engines. It isn't harmful if used for occasional diagnostic or corrective (cleaning) use. If adding "heavy" oil to your fuel gives you "more power", your fuel system components (IP, injectors) are worn out. Older Diesel engine fuel system components were designed with vastly greater internal tolerances and lower fuel pressures. If you are going to use an oil type additive, I recommend 2-cycle oil (TCW-3) to help with lubricity, or a popular Diesel fuel additive. Using a branded additive can offer other advantages, such as water management and cetane rating increase (improved starting, less smoke, smoother running, and perhaps a little more power/economy). 2-cycle oil is designed to burn, unlike ATF, which is designed to NOT burn. If you insist on regularly using an oil additive, other than 2-cycle oil, use motor oil (30wt. ND, preferred). It is heavier, has a much lighter additive package, and is much more friendly with combustion chamber components and rubber. ATF was never intended to meet with combustion, while engine oil is, to some degree, in every engine application.

[rustyk]

I'm a recovering fuels and lube engineer. ATF was once used when leaded gasoline was the norm; ATF added to the gaso would change combustion parameters, and help scavenge the deposits.


Sulfur isn't a lubricant...

Actually, it is.

As Dmax has pointed out, ATF does have additives that can't be counted on to combust completely, nor not to cause damage. 2-cycle engine oil is the safe bet; it's what I use.


ATF also will clean the system out due mostly to all the detergents in it.

Not so. ATF has a modest (very modest) amount of anti-oxidants and other additives formulated to extend service life. There are also slip-stick and EP (or HD) additives. Detergents suspend moisture (and other stuff) in the product, and ATF is concocted to cause water to drop out. Moisture is rarely a problem in trannies, since they are closed systems, with no operations that produce water as a byproduct, nor introduce moisture into the system.

[NH2112]

If you're going to put something red in the fuel, Marvel Mystery Oil is a better choice. But I think even that's best left as an engine oil treatment for sticking lifters, and use 2-stroke oil as a lubricity additive as has been said.

[JohnC]

If you're going to put something red in the fuel, Marvel Mystery Oil is a better choice.

MMO is almost 100% mineral spirits. If you want to save money, use paint thinner... ;)

[Stratosurfer]

OK People,
I'm back on 2 stroke oil. The only thing I don't like about it is my rides smell like the Suzuki 90 I rode to school in the '70s. And I do get some 'blue' smoke on start up and heavy acceleration.

I love the smell of chainsaws in the morning...

It's that smell, that gasoline smell.

It smells like: VICTORY!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bPXVGQnJm0w

:D

[anp4god]

Welcome to TDP

The 6.5 was built during the 1992 to 2001 era. The current and upcoming regs have no effect on previously manufactured vehicles.

The only vehicles currently being manufactured "NEW" with a 6.5 are the military HMMWV with the P400 engine.

These rigs are exempt from the regs anyway.

I would not worry too much about your older vehicle and the new regs.

Oh how I wish this were still true! I had to have my rig smogged last year. It passed with no problems, but it's essentially stock. I would really like to upgrade the exhaust and computer, but I haven't found a very good option besides keeping a stock setup to install for smog testing.
Has anyone else come up with exhaust and computer upgrades that pass smog in California?

[DennisG01]

Mine doesn't get smog tested, so I can't comment with anything quantitative. But, currently, I see less visible (or at least not more) smoke than when things were stock (look in my signature). A good tune (by a reputable tuner) will be able to fine tune the programming to give you better economy/power while still keeping the exhaust clear... possibly even cleaner since the engine is more efficient.

[a5150nut]

What couny in Northern California is requiring you to smog a diesel? You got me worried now, I'm in the bay area.

[DmaxMaverick]

What couny in Northern California is requiring you to smog a diesel? You got me worried now, I'm in the bay area.

Relax. Only 1998+.

[ginger743]

Annual Diesel smog check is required here in the Las Vegas area. I think it has to do with large cities or the propensity for the area to accumulate heavy smog.

Las Vegas being in a Valley we accumulate a little smog when the wind goes away.

California modified their testing parameters a few years ago, for example new vehicles are exmpt for the first few years, they said , " why test those new cars , since they pass for so many years when new anyway". Also every other year is the way it was when I lived there in the Los Angeles area a few years ago.

Jerry

[argo]

In Delaware they do a simple check on pre-97 diesels. If it doesn't smoke at idle, you pass. 1997 up gets the standard OBD-II computer hookup check. They just plug in to the diagnostic port and check for any emissions related codes and for all OBD-II test parameters to be OK.

[ginger743]

Here in Las Vegas they " sniff " the exhaust at idle then put it on cruise under load for a specified length of time..

Jerry